Long-term studies by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists have found that a cooling in ocean temperatures led to increased phytoplankton blooms
I think there is something else taking place than lower water temps (besides, didn't you say the oceans are warming?.. get your story straight.. Really now!! ;0)
Looking at the chart from that first link, there is a dramatic rise in phytoplankton in SF bay ONLY in the period of 1999-2004.. But in PREVIOUS periods of lower temps, we don't see that kind of growth..
toxics.usgs.gov
So.. they also mention the decline in Clam biomass, due to encroaching predators. So, might it be possible that LOWER ocean temps resulted in those predators seeking the warmer waters of SF Bay? Wipe out the filter feeders and suddenly you have an out of control Phytoplankton bloom!! Sounds logical to me.. Reduce the predators, and Clam populations will be restored and phytoplankton levels will return the mean average.
But the biggest problem with that article is that it specifically deals with a very small area. It certainly DOES NOT reflect a global reality..
Furthermore, despite mentioning "nutrients", there is no discussion of measurements of increased Iron availability..
Btw, why do you think those waters became colder in the face of Snobal Warming?
What do you think Jacques Cousteau was doing on his ship besides making movies? Is there a reason you can't figure this out?
I think his grandfather was probably a lot more active than Jacques Cousteau was in 1884. Jacques was still a distant twinkle in his Grandfather's eye..
Examination of 24,519 measurements of coastal ocean pH spanning 8 years ( Fig. 1) revealed several patterns. First, in contrast to the historical perspective that the ocean is well buffered, pH exhibited a pronounced 24-hour cycle, spanning 0.24 units during a typical day ( Fig. 1A). This diurnal oscillation is readily explained by daily variation in photosynthesis and background respiration: water pH increases as CO2 is taken up, via photosynthesis, over the course of the day, and then declines as respiration and diffusion from the atmosphere replenish CO2 overnight ( 16).
Eight years IS NOT 100 years... So what they are doing is trying to create an historical model based upon VERY LIMITED CURRENT DATA, then trying to project it back 100 years to a point where there is almost no data for PH levels, let alone Phytoplankton. And there are so many factors that impact that model that are not being incorporated, including (micro)nutrient availability. Note the above paragraph states that PH levels show a "PRONOUNCED 24 hour cycle", primarily impacted by the level of photosynthesis that occurs.
The more phytoplankton (and photosynthesis) the more alkaline the PH level. And during the night, PH levels rise as atmospheric CO2 dissolved into the colder waters.
So what we have here is a "chicken and egg" argument. I'm telling you that it takes a chicken (phytoplankton) to produce the Egg (CO2 uptake and reduction).. You're trying to tell us we have to increase the number of Eggs first (reduce CO2 levels by other means in order to produce more Chickens).
But again.. I'm TELLING YOU that phytoplankton, and especially the more desirable Diatoms that die and sink as "Marine Snow", will grow in CO2 concentrations up to 3X current levels and they FLOURISH. Therefore, if we had double the amount of Diatomic Phytoplankton in the oceans, it's quite likely the PH level would be greatly reduced because of the increased photosynthesis.
It's scientific Logic..
As for the Mauna Loa graph.. Again, it's one part of the world's oceans. But again, if phytoplankton levels are reduced there, then PH levels will go up because of the lower amount of CO2 being consumed by Algal photosynthesis.
Again.. the KEY and IDEAL type of Phytoplankton that should be promoted are Diatoms. And we don't need to do it near a coastline.. There are ANY NUMBER OF HNLC ZONES that are available for Iron fertilization.
geos.ed.ac.uk
The authors of the above article make a great analogy.. Think of HNLC zones like desert regions that appear lifeless until it rains, at which point the desert blooms.. Ever been to Arizona after their Monsoon rains??
The same analogy holds true with regard to Iron. If it's not available, then phytoplankton have a very difficult time flourishing, no matter how nutrient rich (in nitrates) the HNLC zone may be..
They also make an interesting observation.. Apparently Copper may play a role in increasing Diatomic Iron uptake for photosynthesis. It's something that deserves more scientific research..
You just can't feasibly make a reasonable argument against conducting further research into Iron Fertilization of the oceans. Even Nature magazine acknowledges that Iron Fertilization works.. (despite those acidic oceans you're so concerned about)..
Each atom of added iron pulled at least 13,000 atoms of carbon out of the atmosphere by encouraging algal growth which, through photosynthesis, captures carbon. In a paper inNature today, the team reports that much of the captured carbon was transported to the deep ocean, where it will remain sequestered for centuries 1 — a 'carbon sink'. nature.com
Show me another process where ONE ATOM of a mineral results in the sequestration of 13,000 atoms of CO2..
The "solution" to your concerns about atmospheric CO2 are staring you right in the face. Yet, you continue to resist further research into its efficacy and put the egg before the chicken..
Hawk |
